Whats the best GPS for Geocaching

[+GeoJake21]

I have been searching for a GPS for geocaching for ages i recently checked out the Magellan GC (which is the geocaching one)and i though it wasnt that good the screen and all with the map picture on it it didnt have satellite mode.

I need one because i cant keep using the app and using Mobile data on it.

So which one in the price range of 0-$500.

So what im asking for is if there is a GPS for geocaching that is like the App

[+Walts Hunting]

Garmin Montana 650t

[insig]

It sounds like you were missing having a detailed road or topo map and satellite imagery. Detailed maps are easy to remedy for lots of handheld GPS devices. There are maps you can buy, and then there are free maps that you can load. For Garmin devices, www.gpsfiledepot.com has a lot of free topo maps, and garmin.openstreetmap.nl has free road maps.

 

Satellite imagery is also possible, although it's not going to be as easy as just turning on your phone and automatically getting it. You'll need a satellite imagery subscription for your product. For the eXplorist GC, you'll have to grab a DigitalGlobe subscription from http://www.magellangps.com/Store/Satellite-Imagery and then download the selected area you want to your device. Keep in mind that the GC doesn't have an SD card slot, so you don't have a lot of space for imagery. For Garmin units, you'll get a BirdsEye Satellite Imagery subscription from http://www.garmin.com/birdseye and go through a similar process of selecting the area you want and downloading it to your device. Once again, if you want large amounts of satellite imagery, a device with a microSD card slot is recommended.

 

Once you get your handheld loaded up with some appropriate maps and some satellite imagery, I think you'll like it a lot more -- regardless of what model you get. Since you're used to a smartphone, I suggest looking at a touchscreen device rather than a button-operated one. Most handheld GPS devices use resistive touch screens that work by putting pressure on the screen rather than capacitive touch screens like your smartphone that work by using the electrical conductivity of your finger. There are a couple of exceptions: The Garmin Oregon 600/650 and the Garmin Monterra both use capacitive touch screens.

[+Mineral2]

The correct answer is: All of them. Pretty much all handhelds released since 2006(?) are compatible with paperless caching. They all give you your position, and the position of the cache that you download to the unit, and thus can calculate the direction you need to walk to get to it.

 

You don't NEED a map to geocache.

You don't NEED satellite imagery to geocache.

 

But pretty much all of the current and recent GPS models on the market with a few exceptions can support mapping and satellite imagery (the latter costs extra).

 

There are no GPS's like the app, except the Garmin Monterra, which you could actually install and use the app. The app lets you live search the entire database and log your finds on the spot. You can't do that with a GPS. You have to do some pre-planning and download caches to the device before you go, and log your finds on the website when you return.

 

So, the answer to your question: They're all good for geocaching. YOU have to decide what model is best for you: How does it feel in your hand, what kind of interface do you like: touch screen, buttons, a single joystick; do you want extra premium features like a barometric altimeter and 3-axis compass. Look at the specs of each GPS model and you decide which one has the right combinations of features for the price you want to pay. Most importantly, go to your local outdoor shop and try one out in your hand.

[+Geo muppetz]

KEEP AWAY FROM THE MAGELLAN EXPLORIST I HAVE A GC AND IT IS TURNING OUT TO BE NOTHING BUT TROUBLE.

At first it was kinda ok, this is my first hand held GPS (I am VERY glad that I got it VERY cheep - now I know why it was cheep) trouble began when I deleted the preloaded caches the closest was over 16,000 kms away and completely useless to me, now I can't load caches to it, it will not down load my 1 found cache (1 found with this thing). I handed my computer and GPS to my tec smart mate last night a 3 hours later he wanted to hit me for buying this bit of rubbish.... the eXplorist GC is currently listed at $38 on the Australian Magellan web page... even they are admitting this GPS is a cheep piece of rubbish.

p.s. Magellan have not bothered to reply to any email enquiry I have sent to them - not even a bite me you dumb ares for asking silly questions.

Garmin units are starting to look attractive.

[+davemcwish]

before I respond I'll declare Garmin bias (ex Oregon 550 now Montana user).

 

Paperless caching - I won't say this is essential, as there's cachers in my locale that just use a paper survey map. For the rest of us I'd say it's essential as lets you download a list in advance; this is the disadvantage as you have to plan where you are going and copy across files. Having prior logs, the hints, D/T rating and pictures with you can all help. It's up to you if you want/need to use them.

 

Maps - Mineral2 is correct you don't NEED a map to geocache but, having done caching in urban areas a map can help to determine which side of road/parking/etc. Living in the UK I use Open Source Maps and you should be able to get them in your area.

 

Camera - Not essential that it's included with your device but you should have one of some description as there's caches where pictures are required to log e.g. virtuals.

 

Size - I started off with an Oregon and it was very useful being the size it is, however not having genetically good eyesight I found the screen size small. Upgrading to a Montanna helped but you need to be aware of the size/weight increase especially if you're out for a whole day.

 

Phone - I do have an iPhone 4s and the official app that I have used if I'm somewhere and fancy and quick cache but haven't got my GPS with me. This is useful but it requires a 3g signal and I'm personally not convinced about the accuracy compared to my Montanna.

 

Ultimately, as you'll find on other threads, it should be a decision based on your needs/style so I'd find a local group/meet and have a look at different units yourself.

Edited February 12, 2014 by davemcwish

[+geodarts]

As others have said, it is a personal thing. What you "need" to cache is different than what may be the "best" for you. I began with a Magellan Meridian that was a great unit in its day. I have used several different units. I recently sold my Montana because there were things that I never quite liked about it. These days, my answer has come down to the iphone 5 (Geosphere) and the Oregon 600. Your answer may be different.

 

Accuracy. Most units will get you where you need to go. The old 60csx is often regarded as setting the standard. I trusted the 62s. When caching with other units, my iphone has often gotten me closer to the cache than handhelds, regardless of whether I have cellular service or am hiking under trees. The Oregon supports GLONASS (as does the phone, newer etrex, and upcoming 64), but I have not noticed much of a difference, if anything, when using it. There comes a time to put the unit away and begin looking.

 

Buttons/Touch. Do you like the feel of a unit that uses buttons or a touch screen? I have not used the joystick on the etrex models, but my preference has run to buttons - perhaps because I did a lot of caching with the garmin 60 series. I used a 62s and liked it as well, but the label on the buttons wore down fast and were not considered to be essential under warranty. The upcoming 64 series promises to be a very good unit.

 

I used the Montana touchscreen. It was good enough but it never felt quite right. The Oregon 600 is like a dream, very responsive. Almost as good as my phone. But if the screen is not locked on either unit, you can find yourself on a completely different menu.

 

Camera. I have never gotten a unit with a camera. None of them are as good as the iphone, which I generally have with me (along with several camera and photo apps). None come close to the small Canon that I often take hiking. It's not a factor for me.

 

Display. Here again my iphone wins hands down. Geosphere offers a beautiful display for the cache information. I would not do an earthcache or a lengthy letterbox without it - or any cache where photos are important. No handheld has anything close to the phone's screen resolution.

 

I liked the larger screen on the Montana, but it had a "go" button at the bottom of the cache description page that was annoying. The 62s was simple and basic, but does not have the resolution of some of the other units. The Oregon 600 has the best display of any handheld I have used and is very readable under different conditions.

 

Durability. This probably depends on what you do. I have dropped and broken handhelds but my phone (with a good case for gripping) is still with me. I returned a couple of broken Colorados and eventually used money from the third party warranty to get a 62s. Apart from the issue with the buttons, it went through a lot. I thought I had lost it on (or off) a trail and ended up with the Oregon. After several visits over several weeks, I finally found it. It started up without a problem. So now I have to decide whether to pay garmin to replace the buttons.

 

I would rate the Oregon and Montana high on my list for durability, but perhaps I have been luckier with them.

 

Paperless Features. I started with a PDA and have never printed a cache description since then - to me this is important.

 

Geosphere on my iphone ranks at the top for its graphic display, powerful filtering of caches, and the way you can combine or select various pocket queries. The Montana's large screen was nice but (as mentioned above) I found its cache information to be a little annoying. The Oregon's interface ranks it a bit higher for me.

 

The 62s has the basic information but is perhaps a little less polished because of its weaker resolution. When I first got it, it sometimes dropped caches or whole pocket queries from its list. I learned to work around it and check before I go, so I don't know how much that could still be a problem.

 

None of the handhelds are particularly good for earthcaching or photo puzzles since they do not display graphics without loading images separately, but I have the phone for that.

 

Wherigo/Chirp. The Colorado was the best handheld for wherigos, but the app on the phone is even better - and since Garmin stopped including the Wherigo player it is not likely to be a factor. Magellan should pick it up but they have never supported it.

 

I returned one Montana because it would not pick up chirps. The second unit kind of did, but the 62s was much better. It received the information right away, when I was still trying to get the Montana to connect. I have not tried a chirp with the Oregon as of yet.

 

Mapping. I switched from Magellans in part because Garmin offered more mapping alternatives. I like the free osm maps and use both 100k and 24k topos (depending on where I am). The Montana was nice with the larger screen and voice routing with the car cradle. The Oregon is good but lacks voice routing. I liked the mapping on the Colorado - and when I replaced it with the 62s it seemed like a step down because of the lower screen resolution.

 

Still, with the phone, all I need to do is press a button from the cache page and it sends the cache coordinates to great offline maps for voice routing, topo, terrain, satellite and trails. The routing app I use is more responsive than I found the Montana to be - it is one reason why I sold the Montana. I got it for that feature but once I upgraded the phone I no longer used the gpsr for that purpose.

 

On the Trail. The Oregon and 62s are easy to carry. The Montana does not have the attachment, but I used it with a belt holster style case and never had an issue during an all day hike. I liked its rechargeable battery and (with a spare) battery life was never a problem.

 

Your consideration on all of the above might vary. If I were to get a unit today I might look seriously at the 64 series when they are released. If only Garmin put the Oregon 600 display into the unit . . . The Monterra sounded interesting but it's far from a finished product.

 

As one more thought, I would also get a model with an electronic compass - you can cache just fine without one but it is nice to have.

 

Go to a store where you can get the feel for different units. Ask other cachers. Buy it from a dealer that guarantees satisfaction. See how it feels when you are holding it. Look at cache pages. How does the interface seem? The difference between "good" and the "best" probably comes down to bells, whistles, and relative cost. If it looks and feels right, it probably is.

Edited February 12, 2014 by geodarts

[+RoadAndTheSky]

The 62 SC is good for geocaching it has a compass screen that can be set with detailed geocache information T; D; size next closest cache. really nice having the information without changing pages.

Maps on Garmin are great, not only free maps but many settings for detail at zoom levels waypoints street label and about anything else you may want to set up for specific situations, such as hiking or P.G.s power trails and so forth.

[+BAMBOOZLE]

I'm a Quad and button man .....my wife and I both use the 62S, I've used a lot of units but like it best. The 64 looks promising once all bugs are out but for now the 62S is a good value.